Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38077750›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in computational neuroscience2023

Cellular computation and cognition.

W Tecumseh Fitch

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Advanced Brain-on-a-Chip for Wetware Computing: A Review.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

W Tecumseh FitchFaculty of Life Sciences and Vienna Cognitive Science Hub, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
University of Vienna · AT

Funding

Austrian Science Fund FWF W 1262
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Contemporary neural network models often overlook a central biological fact about neural processing: that single neurons are themselves complex, semi-autonomous computing systems. Both the information processing and information storage abilities of actual biological neurons vastly exceed the simple weighted sum of synaptic inputs computed by the "units" in standard neural network models. Neurons are eukaryotic cells that store information not only in synapses, but also in their dendritic structure and connectivity, as well as genetic "marking" in the epigenome of each individual cell. Each neuron computes a complex nonlinear function of its inputs, roughly equivalent in processing capacity to an entire 1990s-era neural network model. Furthermore, individual cells provide the biological interface between gene expression, ongoing neural processing, and stored long-term memory traces. Neurons in all organisms have these properties, which are thus relevant to all of neuroscience and cognitive biology. Single-cell computation may also play a particular role in explaining some unusual features of human cognition. The recognition of the centrality of cellular computation to "natural computation" in brains, and of the constraints it imposes upon brain evolution, thus has important implications for the evolution of cognition, and how we study it.

Indexed as

cellular computingcognitioncomputational neurosciencedendritesdendritic computingneural network models

Identifiers

PMID38077750
PMCPMC10702520
OpenAlexW4388946036

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.